All over the world women are the predominant providers of informal care for family members with chronic medical conditions or disabilities, including the elderly and adults with mental illnesses. It has been suggested that there are several societal and cultural demands on women to adopt the role of a family-caregiver. Stress-coping theories propose that women are more likely to be exposed to caregiving stressors, and are likely to perceive, report and cope with these stressors differently from men. Many studies, which have examined gender differences among family-caregivers of people with mental illnesses, have concluded that women spend more time in providing care and carry out personal-care tasks more often than men. These studies have also found that women experience greater mental and physical strain, greater caregiver-burden, and higher levels of psychological distress while providing care. However, almost an equal number of studies have not found any differences between men and women on these aspects. This has led to the view that though there may be certain differences between male and female caregivers, most of these are small in magnitude and of doubtful clinical significance. Accordingly, caregiver-gender is thought to explain only a minor proportion of the variance in negative caregiving outcomes. A similar inconsistency characterizes the explanations provided for gender differences in caregiving such as role expectations, differences in stress, coping and social support, and response biases in reporting distress. Apart from the equivocal and inconsistent evidence, there are other problems in the literature on gender differences in caregiving. Most of the evidence has been derived from studies on caregivers of elderly people who either suffer from dementia or other physical conditions. Similar research on other mental illnesses such as schizophrenia or mood disorders is relatively scarce. With changing demographics and social norms men are increasingly assuming roles as caregivers. However, the experience of men while providing care has not been explored adequately. The impact of gender on caregiving outcomes may be mediated by several other variables including patient-related factors, socio-demographic variables, and effects of kinship status, culture and ethnicity, but these have seldom been considered in the research on gender differences. Finally, it is apparent that methodological variations in samples, designs and assessments between studies contribute a great deal to the observed gender differences. This review highlights all these issues and concludes that there is much need for further research in this area if the true nature of gender differences in family-caregiving of mental illnesses is to be discerned.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a complete shut-down of the entire world and almost all the countries are presently in a “lockdown” mode. While the lockdown strategy is an essential step to curb the exponential rise of COVID-19 cases, the impact of the same on mental health is not well known. Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the psychological impact of lockdown due to COVID-19 pandemic on the general public with an objective to assess the prevalence of depression, anxiety, perceived stress, well-being, and other psychological issues. Materials and Methods: It was an online survey conducted under the aegis of the Indian Psychiatry Society. Using the Survey Monkey platform, a survey link was circulated using the Whatsapp. The survey questionnaire included perceived stress scale, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale to assess perceived stress, anxiety, depression, and mental well-being, respectively. The survey link was circulated starting from April 6, 2020 and was closed on April 24, 2020. Results: During the survey, a total of 1871 responses were collected, of which 1685 (90.05%) responses were analyzed. About two-fifth (38.2%) had anxiety and 10.5% of the participants had depression. Overall, 40.5% of the participants had either anxiety or depression. Moderate level of stress was reported by about three-fourth (74.1%) of the participants and 71.7% reported poor well-being. Conclusions: The present survey suggests that more than two-fifths of the people are experiencing common mental disorders, due to lockdown and the prevailing COVID-19 pandemic. This finding suggests that there is a need for expanding mental health services to everyone in the society during this pandemic situation.

No abstract

Over the years many scales have been designed for screening, diagnosis and assessing the severity of delirium. In this paper we review the various instruments available to screen the patients for delirium, instruments available to diagnose delirium, assess the severity, cognitive functions, motoric subtypes, etiology and associated distress. Among the various screening instruments, NEECHAM confusion scale and delirium observation scale appear to be most suitable screening instrument for patients' in general medical and surgical wards, depending on the type of rater (physician or nurse). In general, the instruments which are used for diagnosis [i.e., confusion assessment method (CAM), CAM for intensive care unit (CAM-ICU), Delirium Rating Scale-revised version (DRS-R-98), memorial selirium assessment scale, etc. ] are based on various Diagnostic and Statistical Manual criteria and have good to excellent reliability and fair to good validity. Among the various diagnostic instruments, CAM is considered to be most useful instrument because of its accuracy, brevity, and ease of use by clinicians and lay interviewers. In contrast, DRS-R-98 appears to be a comprehensive instrument useful for diagnosis, severity rating and is sensitive to change and hence can be used for monitoring patients over a period. In the ICU setting, evidence suggests that CAM-ICU and Nursing Delirium Screening Scale had comparable sensitivities, but CAM-ICU has higher specificity. With regard to assessment of delirium in pediatric age group, certain instruments like Pediatric Anesthesia Emergence Delirium scale and pediatric CAM-ICU has been designed and have been found to be useful.

This international guideline proposes improving clozapine package inserts worldwide by using ancestry-based dosing and titration. Adverse drug reaction (ADR) databases suggest that clozapine is the third most toxic drug in the United States (US), and it produces four times higher worldwide pneumonia mortality than that by agranulocytosis or myocarditis. For trough steady-state clozapine serum concentrations, the therapeutic reference range is narrow, from 350 to 600 ng/mL with the potential for toxicity and ADRs as concentrations increase. Clozapine is mainly metabolized by CYP1A2 (female non-smokers, the lowest dose; male smokers, the highest dose). Poor metabolizer status through phenotypic conversion is associated with co-prescription of inhibitors (including oral contraceptives and valproate), obesity, or inflammation with C-reactive protein (CRP) elevations. The Asian population (Pakistan to Japan) or the Americas’ original inhabitants have lower CYP1A2 activity and require lower clozapine doses to reach concentrations of 350 ng/mL. In the US, daily doses of 300–600 mg/day are recommended. Slow personalized titration may prevent early ADRs (including syncope, myocarditis, and pneumonia). This guideline defines six personalized titration schedules for inpatients: 1) ancestry from Asia or the original people from the Americas with lower metabolism (obesity or valproate) needing minimum therapeutic dosages of 75–150 mg/day, 2) ancestry from Asia or the original people from the Americas with average metabolism needing 175–300 mg/day, 3) European/Western Asian ancestry with lower metabolism (obesity or valproate) needing 100–200 mg/day, 4) European/Western Asian ancestry with average metabolism needing 250–400 mg/day, 5) in the US with ancestries other than from Asia or the original people from the Americas with lower clozapine metabolism (obesity or valproate) needing 150–300 mg/day, and 6) in the US with ancestries other than from Asia or the original people from the Americas with average clozapine metabolism needing 300–600 mg/day. Baseline and weekly CRP monitoring for at least four weeks is required to identify any inflammation, including inflammation secondary to clozapine rapid titration.

Background Little is known about the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on children with attention-deficit hyperkinetic disorder (ADHD). This study aimed to assess the impact of lockdown on children with the ADHD, and their families. Additionally, feasibility of carrying out “text message-based” intervention was evaluated. Methods An online survey was performed to evaluate the impact of lockdown on children with ADHD and their family members. Additionally, a “text message”-based intervention was performed over 2 weeks. Along with the text-based intervention, we also provided reading materials and an option of telephonic consultation. Results Of the 80 parents who initially consented to participate, 48 filled the baseline survey, and 41 agreed to receive intervention. Out of 41, 29 filled satisfaction survey. During the lockdown period, there was worsening of symptoms of ADHD in the form of increase (slight or marked) in the activity level (50.1%), irritability (45.8%), and disturbing or disruptive behavior (47.7%) in children. In terms of behavior of family members, there was marked/slight increase in irritability (37.5%), and shouting at the child (43.8%), verbal abuse (25%), and punishing the child (27.1%). Additionally, there was an increase in the praising (67.6%) and spending time with the child (72.9%). Text-based messages on a scale of 0 to 10 were rated as 5.79 for the content, 5.76 for the usefulness, and 6 for satisfaction. Conclusion Lockdown resulted in worsening of symptoms among children of ADHD and it had impact on the interaction pattern of the children and parents. A “text message”-based intervention is a feasible and possibly acceptable option to deal with the behavioral problem of the children and adolescents with ADHD.

COVID-19 pandemic has led to a worldwide crisis. At present, everyone is focusing on the prevention of COVID-19 infection, preparing and discussing issues related to physical health consequences. However, it is important to understand that the life-threatening negative physical health consequences are going to be faced by a few, but everyone is going to face the negative mental health consequences of the pandemic. At various places COVID-19 hospitals are being established, to address the physical health consequences of the pandemic. However, mental health professionals have not been very actively involved in the management of people going through this pandemic. This viewpoint discusses the mental health consequences of the pandemic for the health care workers, people who are undergoing quarantine, people who are admitted to the COVID-19 hospitals, and those who have recovered from the infection. The article also highlights the mental health needs of people at different levels and the kind of interventions, which may be carried out.

Depression as a disorder has always been a focus of attention of researchers in India. Over the last 50-60 years, large number of studies has been published from India addressing various aspects of this commonly prevalent disorder. The various aspects studied included epidemiology, demographic and psychosocial risk factor, neurobiology, symptomatology, comorbidity, assessment and diagnosis, impact of depression, treatment related issues and prevention of depression in addition to the efficacy and tolerability of various antidepressants. Here, we review data on various aspects of depression, originating from India.